masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Article for Background Races
This project is pretty much done. However, as sure as I am that I've collected all pertinent subjects for this article, since there are dozens of planets across both ME games, it's always possible I've missed a race or two. If you know of one I've missed, please let me know so I can add it to the article. Also, implementation of Background Races will require community approval because it will affect several other articles. I intend to redirect the article Arthenn to it (the content of Arthenn is on Background Races, rendering an article for Arthenn unnecessary), and alter the redirects Zeioph, Inusannon, and Thoi'han to lead to it. Furthermore, the links for the Arthenn, Inusannon, Thoi'han, and Zeioph will be removed from the Races page, and replaced by a link at the top of the page to the Background Races article. So, thoughts? Yay or nay? -- Commdor (Talk) 05:01, October 4, 2010 (UTC) Voting For Neutral Oppose #As of right now, I have to say no because of the overlooked section on the redo of the Races article. Lancer1289 20:01, October 11, 2010 (UTC) #Concur. All for the creation of a Background Races article (not that it matters now, as it's already been created), but there is no reason to mangle the races page as is described here. There simply hasn't been sound or sufficient reasoning presented to merit this change. SpartHawg948 20:06, October 11, 2010 (UTC) Comments *I have to say it does look good and this can also take care of a few redirects that are hanging around here, somewhere. Overall I think it does look good, and I think it would make a good article. I'm sure there are still probably a few things that could be improved, but then there are always things that can be improved. If I think of anything, I'll be sure to speak up. Lancer1289 05:07, October 4, 2010 (UTC) *Looking very nice, and I agree that as a repository of ME information this wiki does need a central location for minor races that don't feature enough for their own articles. You've put a lot of work into this, well done. My only quibble is the name, "Background races" just strikes me as a little out of place somehow. Is there an alternate way to describe minor extinct civilisations? Bronzey 07:59, October 4, 2010 (UTC) ::It was the best term I could think of. It fits. These races are in the background of ME lore relative to the others, after all. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:59, October 6, 2010 (UTC) Any more comments? -- Commdor (Talk) 19:06, October 9, 2010 (UTC) :Why is 433 Spidau at the bottom? Isn't it more the norm to place numbered entries above the alphabetical entries? SpartHawg948 19:20, October 9, 2010 (UTC) ::I must have overlooked that when adding 433 Spidau in. Fixed now. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:28, October 9, 2010 (UTC) :::That's really all I noticed. It looks good. Too bad we don't have any images though... is there any chance of getting some of those nice galaxy images like on the Races page? :P No, seriously though, it looks very nice. SpartHawg948 19:30, October 9, 2010 (UTC) Alrighty, time to set this up. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:35, October 11, 2010 (UTC) :Where is the part stating that a big chunk of the races page would be nixed? I don't remember voting on that, nor would I have, as I really don't agree with that idea at all. SpartHawg948 19:46, October 11, 2010 (UTC) ::It's explained in the second paragraph of the Other Notes section. I thought it was clear and visible. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:48, October 11, 2010 (UTC) :::Hmmm... appears I overlooked that section. This is genuinely a case of my bad, but there was no reason for removal of all that content. It was clear, though I may argue that it wasn't visible, as it seems at least two users who voted on this missed it. But yeah, there is absolutely no reason to remove all those races from the races page. Keep them there, with their links going to the background races page. SpartHawg948 19:50, October 11, 2010 (UTC) ::::I guess I overlooked it as well, but I also tend to agree that removing all of those links really doesn't help the article. Granted all the links go to the same place, people may not remember how to spell them. I'd rather keep them on the page then eliminate them altogether as well. Lancer1289 19:53, October 11, 2010 (UTC) Seems to me that, since there does appear to have been some confusion about what this proposal was actually intended as (i.e. a redo of the Races page, as opposed to simply creating an article for Background Races, as the title implied), and if it is going to be as controversial as it seems to be, we should do an actual vote, which was not done for this proposal. SpartHawg948 19:56, October 11, 2010 (UTC) :Sure I'm game for a vote. Lancer1289 19:59, October 11, 2010 (UTC) :Voting set up and currenlty no because of the redo of the Races article. Lancer1289 20:01, October 11, 2010 (UTC) Project has been implemented. The issue of removing links from the Races article has been dropped. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:30, October 12, 2010 (UTC)